The Sukhoi PAK FA (or PAK-FA) is a fifth-generation fighter which is being developed by Russia. PAK FA stands for Perspektivnyi Aviatsionnyi Kompleks Frontovoi Aviatsyi which roughly means Advanced Tactical Frontline Fighter. It is being developed by a consortium of companies spearheaded by Sukhoi OKB. Sukhoi’s internal project codename is T-50. The PAK FA is intended to replace the MiG-29 Fulcrum and Su-27 Flanker in the Russian Air Force. It is scheduled to have its first flight in 2009 and enter service with the Russian Air Force subsequently. It is designed to be comparable to the American F-22 Raptor and F-35 Lightning II.
The aircraft will feature a long combat radius, supersonic cruise speed, low radar cross section, super maneuverability, and the ability to make short takeoffs and landings. In accordance with the technical requirements, the PAK FA will have a normal takeoff weight of 20 tons, which is close to the average normal takeoff weight of the two American airplanes, the F-35 JSF (17.2 tons) and the F-22 (24 tons). The new fighter (a medium version) will have a traditional wing form, though the experience gathered as a result of Berkut’s test flights will be taken in consideration when designing the fighter. It is supposed that it will be created using the Stealth technology, and equipped with two AL-41F engines by the Saturn scientific and industrial enterprise, a radar system with an active phased array (to all appearances, it will be produced by the Fazatron-NIIR corporation), and high-precision weapons.
In early 2002 Sukhoi was chosen as prime contractor for the planned Russian fifth-generation fighter is called the PAK FA [ Perspektivnyi Aviatsionnyi Kompleks Frontovoi Aviatsyi - Future Air Complex for Tactical Air Forces]. This intermediate class twin-engined fighter will be larger than a MiG-29 and smaller than a Su-27. The new fighter is intended to be about the same size as the US F-35 JSF, with a primary air superiority mission and ground attack and reconnaissance being secondary missions.
The aircraft will feature a long combat radius, supersonic cruise speed, low radar cross section, supermaneuverability, and the ability to make short takeoffs and landings. In accordance with the technical requirements, the PAK FA will have a normal takeoff weight of 20 tons, which is close to the average normal takeoff weight of the two American airplanes, the F-35 JSF (17.2 tons) and the F-22 (24 tons). The new fighter (a medium version) will have a traditional wing form, though the experience gathered as a result of Berkut’s test flights will be taken in consideration when designing the fighter. It is supposed that it will be created using the Stealth technology, and equipped with two AL-41F engines by the Saturn scientific and industrial enterprise, a radar system with an active phased array (to all appearances, it will be produced by the Fazatron-NIIR corporation), and high-precision weapons.
The government commission decided on 26 April 2002 to choose the Sukhoi holding company as the head company to develop and produce the fighter of the fifth generation. The prototype of the PAK FA would take-off in 2006 and that in 2010 the aircraft would be ready for series production. The first deliveries, both for Russian armed forces and for export, would be possible in 2011-12.
The new airplane is being proposed to be brought from the concept design to a prototype series in less than 9 years. Historically, fourth and fifth generation fighters have not been created in less than 15 years. The Russian government has promised to allocate 1.5 billion dollars for the PAK FA through 2010. But the Russian Air Force is receiving less than 200 million dollars a year during this period, and will spend it primarily on other needs.
The prices and sources of funding will determine the destiny of the whole program. To date officials agree that the program will cost $1.5 billion. However, $1.5 billion is the sum needed for creating a new generation of avionics for the fighter (considering the fact that pre-production models of the phased array have already been produced, and will soon be tested). Completion of the AL-41F engine (present readiness is 30 percent) will require, in the opinion of the boss of Rosaviakosmos, 600 – 800 million dollars. Saturn said that launching of production of the AL-41F engine would take $150 million. An improved version of the AL-31F will be used on the aircraft originally (though it is not clear how these heavy motors are reconciled with the concept of a 20-ton fighter). The upgrade of these engines will require expenditures of 1.2-1.5 billion dollars. And finally, designers will have to spend several hundred millions of dollars on creating a new airframe.
State financing will cover not more than 20-22 percent of the cost of the development of the PAK FA. It will thus be necessary to draw extra budgetary sources of funding, lending the development program a principle of openness for international cooperation. In the opinion of experts, export income, if it is taken from the plants, can provide not more than 1 billion dollars. It is maintained that the insufficient amounts can be received from foreign partners.
The plane’s development will be conducted with a view of achieving a reasonable compromise between its cost and combat efficiency, and take into account the market demand. exports sales of the new warplane must reach 500 to 600 fighters at a price of $35 to $40 million each to make production of the new aircraft profitable.
According to some reports, India and Russia have agreed to jointly develop this fifth-generation fighter, under a scheduled with entry into service in 2009. This would be the first such joint development venture between the two countries.
There is little chance that Russia will have fifth-generation pursuit planes of its own. Development and construction of a fifth-generation fighter would require about $20 billion dollars, and as of early 2004 it was unlikely that the government will appropriate financing of this scale. “The problem is that economic and military authorities in this country live in parallel spaces and have no common approach to problems,” according to Deputy Director of the analytical department of the Political and Military Analysis Institute Alexander Khramchikhin.
Maiden flight:
On December 8, 2009, Deputy Prime Minister Sergei Ivanov announced that the first trials with the fifth-generation aircraft would begin in 2010. The testing, however, has commenced earlier than stated, with the first successful taxiing test taking place on December 24, 2009. The aircraft’s maiden flight took place on 29 January 2010 at KnAAPO’s Komsomolsk-na-Amure Dzemgi Airport; the aircraft was piloted by Sergey Bogdan and the flight lasted for 47 minutes.
General characteristics
* Crew: 1 (pilot)
* Length: 22.0 m (72 ft 2 in)
* Wingspan: 14.2 m (46 ft 7 in)
* Height: 6.05 m (19 ft 10 in)
* Wing area: 78.8 m² (848 ft²)
* Empty weight: 18,500kg (40,786 lb)
* Loaded weight: 26,000 kg (57,320 lb)
* Useful load: 7,500 kg (16,535 lb)
* Max takeoff weight: 37,000 kg (81,571 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Saturn-Lyulka AL-41F turbofan
o Dry thrust: 9,800 kgf (21,605 lbf) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 15,500 kgf (34,172 lbf) each
Performance
* Maximum speed: Mach 2.5 at altitude (2,527 km/h, 1,586 mph)
* g-limits: +10 to +11 g (+98.1 to +107.9 m/s², +321.7 to +353.9 ft/s²)
* Cruise speed: 1,300 km/h (807.8 mph)
* Ferry range: 4,000 to 5,500 km (2,485 to 3,418 mi)
* Service ceiling 20,000 m (65,617 ft)
* Rate of climb: 350 m/s (68,898 ft/min)
* Wing loading: 470 kg/m² (96.3 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: 0.84 (dry thrust)
* Minimum thrust/weight:
o With afterburner: 1.19
* Runway length requirement: 350 m (1,148 ft)
* Endurance: 3.3 hrs (198 mins)
h3Armament/h3
* Guns:/b 2× 30 mm internal cannon
* Hardpoints:
8 total, 4 on each side of the aircraft
Avionics
* Radar:BRLS AFAR/AESA radar
* Frequency: 3 mm (0.118 in)
* Diameter: 0.7 m (2 ft 4 in)
* Targets: 32 tracked, 8 engaged
* Range: 400 km (248 mi)
o EPR: 3 m² (32.3 ft²): 160 km (99.4 mi)
o Azimuth: +/-70°, +90/-50°
* Power: 4,000 W
* Weight: 65 to 80 kg (143 to 176 lb)
Related:
Sukhoi/HAL FGFA a Indian Stealth Fighter
“”
41 Comments Received
January 20th, 2008 @1:43 am
Hey larkins,
PAK_FA isnt just Russian, But Indian too.. You may call it JSF aircraft
January 20th, 2008 @9:28 am
Yes.. PAKFA is a joint fighter developed by India and Russia. The development i.e techonlogy is Russian and the money is Indian.
February 25th, 2008 @9:01 am
Insane! This so called PAKFA is not a copy…but an exact replica of our F-22!!! If Russian fighters are so much more superior to western fighters, as most anti-American nations agree, then why are they incorporating stealth (US technology), instead of improving their curvaceous 3D vectoring Su-35 or MiG-29? Russian technology these days are nothing more the untested theories rumors. it’s not just India financing but China too.
March 1st, 2008 @3:39 pm
Dear Anonymous, as usual you prove that the general public lives by press propaganda and base assumptions…
…a fool’s wisdom.
The Russian fighters are built with a very different air doctrine and role in mind.
These aircraft are meant to be used in conjunction with an extensive air-defense network. They are also a lot cheaper than American planes which are instead used in power projection.
In a defensive war you can and probably will be forced to accept losses. Given that you’ve got no choice but to fight even the public will accept this.
In a real air war, where air superiority will be continuously contested, even with their superior kill-rates, American planes will be at disadvantage when it comes to sorting in all conditions with less then ideal supply and/or maintenance conditions.BR/BR/Simply put, the Russian doctrine is different, and so are Russian planes.BR/BR/Until you grasp this fundamental difference your arguments will completely miss their mark.BR/Their is more to warfare, than comparing stats and choosing the ‘best’ in the league. This is war, not a sport event.
June 20th, 2008 @1:23 pm
Stealth technology is not american. They robbed it from germany after the war, like so many other things.
The first flying wing was the
Horten Ho-X
http://www.luft46.com/horten/hox.html
and the first stealth plane the Gotha:
http://www.secondworldwarhistory.com/go229_gotha.asp
July 10th, 2008 @11:40 am
…and the jet engine was a British invention – pinched by the Americans who promised nuclear technology in exchanged then welched on the deal!
…and radar was invented in Britain and Germany then pinched by America.
Honestly, don’t you guys do anything yourself?
July 14th, 2008 @6:49 am
Anonymous said:
The Russian fighters are built with a very different air doctrine and role in mind.
These aircraft are meant to be used in conjunction with an extensive air-defense network. They are also a lot cheaper than American planes which are instead used in power projection.
In a defensive war you can and probably will be forced to accept losses. Given that you’ve got no choice but to fight even the public will accept this.
In a real air war, where air superiority will be continuously contested, even with their superior kill-rates, American planes will be at disadvantage when it comes to sorting in all conditions with less then ideal supply and/or maintenance conditions.
Their so-called doctrine has proved flawed again and again and again… Israel creamed Russian designs with French some AMerican designs and they were outnumbered, outgunned, surrounded and did not have the technological advantage they have today (remember that the American aid came only after the major wars had been fought, America only provided aid in the very last parts of the last major war, the Yom Kippur War). It was a major proving ground for the Western doctrine vs. Russian doctrine and the Russian doctrine proved to be HEAVILY FLAWED INFERIOR.
And things have not changed, look at how easily Israel evaded Russia’s state of the art air defences installed in Syria last year when they took out the Nuclear installation.
Although Vietnam was not such a resounding success, there too, the Western Doctrine beat out the Russian doctrine.
The “numbers game”, inundating your enemy with massive numbers has never proved itself in modern combat. Some would point out the WWII victory of Russian Armour but that was not a numbers victory alone.
The various Israeli wars, on various fronts and conditions (the Golan area is a lush hillside, the South is a dry desert) proved unequivacely that numbers alone do not insure victory. IN every one of its wars it was HEAVILY OUTNUMBERED and often made due with equivalent or inferior technology.
Furthermore, the trend seems to be moving away from long protracted wars spanning extremely large areas, again disfavoring the massive numbers game Russia likes to play. I would also wager the Russia will have a hard time maintaining, manning managing logistics for a large force due to financial constraints (among many other things).
Simply put, the Russian doctrine is different, and so are Russian planes.
Until you grasp this fundamental difference your arguments will completely miss their mark.BR/Their is more to warfare, than comparing stats and choosing the ‘best’ in the league. This is war, not a sport event.
On this we agree 1000%!
September 3rd, 2008 @4:01 am
until now,american fighters cannot see these “russian stealth fighters” on their radar screen ‘coz they are all inside their hangars/factories/labs.
make ‘em airborne over an’ let see if they are stealth enuf
September 27th, 2008 @7:42 am
Russian Technology? LOL
Bunch of propaganda, thats all.
Russia will always be 20 years behind the US as far as I’m concerned. They always claim they have superior technology and we just blow it up like always..
Remember Gulf War 2? The Russians were claiming that the GPS Jammers that Iraq was using would make our bombs go off target.. wrong, we blew it to bits.
We destroyed Iraq’s Military twice, Russia’s military would have no chance against our superior weapons.
October 3rd, 2008 @9:13 am
Lest we not forget, thrust vectoring was also a stolen technology, stolen from the russians. Also the russins see little need in stealth technologies, seeing as that same type of technology functions less than useful in their type of climate. Also, if one were to argue that point, the russians have for a long time, been developing technology to counter steatlth technology. Which they claim they have done.
October 3rd, 2008 @9:46 pm
Also the russins see little need in stealth technologies, seeing as that same type of technology functions less than useful in their type of climate.
What a load of turd! Are you making up as you are going along? Stealth has been tested everywhere, from hot deserts to frigid Alaska. We’re not talking about wheels tracks here, but a means of absorbing or otherwise lessening radar IR detection.BR/BR/Russians do like and want Stealth, that’s why they spent multi-millions, if not billions on their failed Plasma Stealth, a very odd expenditure considering the Americans had already refined a far superior, far lighter means of achieving Stealth. HECK, even if Plasma Stealth worked, one has to wonder – wouldn’t the Russian Pilot’s radar be as useless as his adversaries? The whole Plasma Stealth thing makes no sense (why seek a powered, heavy, unproven method when an unpowered, light and proven method exists)
Also, if one were to argue that point, the russians have for a long time, been developing technology to counter steatlth technology. Which they claim they have done.
Right, they also claimed they’d be flying the PakFA in 2007…
Sir, Russia had it’s hayday but it’s now over… Alas, they have fallen behind and considering current situation and issues, they are not in a position to both catchup and overtake the Americans.
If you are going to argue otherwise please, be pragmatic and consider economics (advantage:USA), academics (advantage:USA, even if not produced domestically, American companies can afford to put the best Russians on their payroll), technology (advantage:USA, they have been working with Stealth since the 70s, they currently run the F22, far ahead of anything on the market), record of reliability (Russian planes never faired well against the American designs, look at the wars of the past 60 years, Russian equipment became wrecks in the vast majority of conflicts) AND OF COURSE customization factors (look at the F16, it’s been upgraded and retrofitted to the max and with ease!)
October 19th, 2008 @9:47 pm
The key to combat or political prevail is the respect to the opponent. Dont you forget that.
Its not reasonable to assume that US is the only place on earth where edge technology is produced. You can never know until you see it. Secret projects are everywhere, I assume.
Remember: Nations do not make technology. Scientists and engineers do.
For every weapon there is always a counter-measure. The more sophisticated the system is the more primitive the counter-measure.BR/BR/Sorry but this is how things have always been working.
October 21st, 2008 @7:10 am
http://www.sluniverse.com/php/vb/politics-religion-society/18029-russian-stealth-bomber-reaches-uk.htmlBR/BR/BR/Refer This URL :………
October 21st, 2008 @7:15 am
Plasma stealth technology offers significant benefits over existing stealth technology and also enables higher-performance aircraft since the shape no longer has to be altered to achieve stealth, so it is useless to alter the shape of your aircraft as you will not be getting the maneuverability that Russian planes have.BR/So as keep flying is American motto, out maneuvering American jets and destroying them is our’s.BR/We have got the upper edge in dog fight.BR/so useless technology, lighter and existent. duh ha ha
November 22nd, 2008 @8:50 pm
i’m waiting for these jets to come and rival the western ones. i must say the design of the jet is wicked
December 27th, 2008 @4:30 pm
Ok Amerikanski, lern this:
1. PAKFA is not a exact replica of the F-22, on the picture 3 you only see a computer animation of a model which used the russians to test the stealth design. The final design of the PAKFA is at picture 2 (black color) and this is a copy of the SU-47 Berkut with stealth-design modifications, which learned the russians from the model (Picture 3). The stealth technology is the same as the F-177A wich crashed over Serbia, parts of the wrack are transferred to Russia, so the russians became this technology.
2. Stealth is NOT a US-Technology! Its a GERMAN Technology, like the cannon from your Abrams Tank! Its developed in germany and build in USA.
3. SU-25 and Mig-29 are not the best and newest fighters of Sukhoi and Mig, this are the SU-47 Berkut (Golden Eagle) and the Mig-39 Project. The SU-47 is the base for the PAKFA and the Mig-39 lost against this Prototype, like the Northrop YF-23 which lost against the YF-22. A third prototype was build from Yakowlew, which lost against the SU-47 too, but this YAK prototype was the base of the american F-35 Lightning 2 (american F-39 = russian technology)! Now Yakowlew and Mikojan-Gurewitsch work together with Sukhoi to complete the PAKFA.
4. Russia has enough US$ to finance the PAKFA (which costs 20 billions US$, Russias reserve is 500 billions US$), but they are no more communists and in the capitalism they will make more profit, so they cooperate with India. And China dont finance the PAKFA, they build their own Stealth-Fighter.
January 11th, 2009 @2:49 am
Stealth as implemented by the U.S. is not a German technology and additionally, “stealth” is the result of a combination of technological solutions, not one overall idea or invention. One of the principal components of a U.S. stealth aircraft is its shape, which give the aircraft the ability to minimize the reflective return of radar signals toward the emitter. That key feature, the shape, is based on obscure Soviet mathematics research that was openly published because the Soviets didn’t realize its importance. Germany played no part in that mathematics discovery nor did German technology or research play any part in connecting that Soviet research to anti-reflective properties due object form as implemented on U.S. aircraft.
January 11th, 2009 @3:41 am
Come on now. Russia is incredibly smart. Produce inferior planes so that the countries that purchase them will need a continuous supply of them… making Russia all the richer. Bait the countries in with lower prices… just don’t tell them they will need many many times more of them. It’s like programming… a competent high end software developer might cost $120 an hour while another developer might charge only $40 an hour. It appears the $40 / hr developer is a good deal… except it will take him 5 or more times as many hours to complete the same job.
January 11th, 2009 @5:53 am
@Anonymous 2:31
Kindly google “X-31″ “F-18 HARV” “F-16 MATV” “F-15 ACTIVE” before you say that thrust vectoring was copied from the Russians. Take this opportunity to learn something new. Thanks and good day.
January 12th, 2009 @1:51 pm
“2. Stealth is NOT a US-Technology! Its a GERMAN Technology,…”
Right…
Read Skunk Works (http://www.amazon.com/Skunk-Works-Personal-Memoir-Lockheed/dp/0316743003) and you’ll realize that Stealth was developed (as it is used in the US) by Americans utilizing math formulas from a Soviet mathematician. The Soviets didn’t think it was worth anything and let it slide by.
January 23rd, 2009 @6:58 am
Hi Folks, just to veer away from the upmanship on technologies….do you really feel it would make a difference?? The Russians got licked in Afghanistan, now is the turn of Americans to get bogged down.
I do not think we are going to see to many dog fights in the future as we have BVRs and missiles capable of hitting targets on air and ground beyond 60 miles.
Want to check up with you folks on effectiveness of the weapon systems on these platforms….(i have neither seen the Russian one neither the American ones to be effective in the last 2-3 years)
February 10th, 2009 @5:05 am
Hmm i have read that BVR missiles are not very effective and have a sucsesse ratio of around 25% in a non jammed inviorment again manuvarible targets. Add jamming and its back to basics, dog fights.
February 24th, 2009 @5:19 am
First of all stealth was discovered by british when they build there fighters with wood becoz they lacked sufficient supply of metal during the war.To that the Russian fighters are copycats of USA models I’think you are totally wrong,the appearance show’s that.Lastly the Russian’s have the capability to build a stealth fighter and there plasma technology did not fail infact they have made more improvements on it.
June 28th, 2009 @7:24 am
I absolutely fail to understand why people go on blabbing about who’s going to win “the fight”. Look guys if there’s one going to take place, It will not be fought with stealth planes alone or perhaps you’ve just forgotten both usa and russia havae about a thousand nuke warheads apiece.
“In the Nuclear World – the true enemy is war itself”
August 30th, 2009 @1:56 am
Just remember all the expenditures in military needs in one year is enough to supply the UN’s food program for 300 years.
Does it make you feel match o to have these parasites ruining the world.
If so then we’re no better then the people we we’re before any of this.=We’ve lost control of our real wants and desires.
When the children cry, let them know why.
When the children sing then the new world begins.
September 13th, 2009 @10:45 pm
Russia's glory days were at the expense of its workers(citizens). America is following this model by forcing inflation on US citizens. It shouldn't be called inflation, it should be called, "you work but your work won't buy you a damn thing." This is what the Fed Res and our government thinks of the American citizen! Thomas Jefferson warned us against the creation of then Fed, he warned us of inflation which makes US workers analogous to Soviet citizens who worked for "the good" of "Mother Russia" basically as slaves. When Capitilism brook out in Russia, there was no money to be paid to citizens as there never was any money, the fascist Russian pig government lined their own pockets with all of it and screwed over the populace. Same thing happening now in the US, we just have a nutral freindly term for it-INFLATION. Will be lucky if our Government buys 1 single f-35 for USAF let alone the Navy, a huge pike dream! I thought the Comanche helicopter cancelation was the biggest secret money grab in US defense history! I was wrong the biggest moeny grab will be the total cancellation of the entire f-35A/B/C program! Time to throw these bumbs out on their ass! Prosecute Hank Paulson!!!
September 21st, 2009 @7:26 am
Well folks- I have seen ONE Russian stealth fighter, and it looks exactly like the F-22, with only a couple if differences that a novice may not notice. And also, I agree that this Russian version will be cheaper, they can copy the design, but they cannot copy the avionics and the engines, and the very sophisticated computer and guidance systems. For every 20 Russian fighters there is ONE F-22 that will take them out. The F-22's radar range is far greater than any fighter aircraft of our day, including the F-35. Although the Russian counterpart is stealth, I am betting a Raptor will still detect it and fire a missile and turn away before the "incredible Russian stealth plane" even knows it has been locked on. Boom. Contest over.
October 6th, 2009 @9:03 pm
I want to note that the images are similar to the F-22 is only a speculative image of the fuselage, you can see it here: http://www.photoarmy.org/2009/10/50-pak-fa-sukhoi...
As for the radar, engines, computer is your opinion, no one has yet seen the engine, radar and onboard computer PAK-FA. But to really find out what best can only be in real combat. Sorry my bad english.
October 28th, 2009 @11:10 am
pls. send me some information about the stealth technology
& its concept
November 8th, 2009 @8:24 pm
PAKFA is not a stealth Aircraft, it's only meant to look like the F-22 and the F-35. The Russians haven't completely solved the stealth technology yet because they lack the classified material. The PAKFA has however, a low radar signature, which the shape of the aircraft contributes.
December 4th, 2009 @9:18 am
Yes you are right, This is not equivalent to Brahmos where India and Russia participated on equal basic. This project will give Indian learning and 5th gen crafts. The Learning will parallely used to develop MCA..
December 9th, 2009 @10:58 am
Miraculous British invention…. let's go back to 1910 and see who invented the jet engine.
December 12th, 2009 @4:54 am
The western world will be defeated even most people think that Russian war machine is inferior. Its weakness lies in its very foundation-Democracy. The Russians can swallow massive casualties because they were indoctrinated by this belief through their Victorious history of war from Napoleon and Hitler. The western world cannot stomach such one single massive death – majority of their people will turn their backs on their leaders where in a democratic system – their leaders must follow. The Tet Offensive shows us all!
December 26th, 2009 @4:33 pm
American's Army is not very strong. Of course, your technologies is very nice, but Russia make something nice soon… And this would be the end of your ?????????! =)
And of course we the best country on the Earth. Because i printing it from Russia and I don't afraid yours peacekeepers =))))
December 27th, 2009 @4:07 pm
One important thing to notice is that russian tehcology that has been exported usually are three generations behind what russian have. Get the impression that they do this to keep US happy. After the Georgian conflict they threatened to sell to the middle east just one generation old weapons systems that created almost a panic.
Don't think you can really compare US and russian technology one on one, they are made with different doctrines in mind and i think they are both really good if you use them according to those doctrines.
January 25th, 2010 @9:50 am
Let's all get along now like one big happy planet
January 27th, 2010 @9:05 pm
Though you sound nobel enough,when the children are hacked to death with machettes the UN stands by and does nothing. When Israel was attacked by Hezbolah from Lebanon,the UN protected them. The UN is the biggest joke in world history. Money makes the world go round and money is the reason wars are fought.The Global Warming LIE is another excuse to sieze power in poor areas of the world. Its ALL about money.Read the Global Warming Copenhagen bill. Money Money Money.
January 30th, 2010 @1:03 am
well,
you guys think that; this is a stealth fighter , you are wrong,its just political news ,not an aviation invention ..
Do the economy of russia will be able to stand with the cost of the fighter.. good luck,, to see an other fighter in the sky,,don't say ..the russian used cheap material ,LOL..
January 30th, 2010 @4:17 pm
PAK-FA T-50's first flight occured on the 29th of January 2010. None of the pictures are accurate or current. The T-50 'Firefox' appears to be largely stolen US technology, a bastardized F-22/YF-23/Su-27. The plane undeniably has stolen US features and is barely a Russian design at all.
January 30th, 2010 @4:18 pm
Stolen technology, yes ! Unfortunately for you idiots it was actually stolen from the Soviet Union. All modern stealth is based on Petr Ufimtsev's mathematical theory of diffraction published as an open source document in 1962 in the USSR and happily translated b U.S. Air Force intelligence in 1971. Ufimtsev then emirated to the U.S. and taught at UCLA where Ben Rich (head of Lockheed's F-117 program) ironically did his graduate work. As an aside, it was also a Russian mathematician that calculated the method to achieve a lunar landing which was used in the Apollo Project.
January 30th, 2010 @4:26 pm
The U.S. has a much bigger problem than foreign military aircraft – its a fiscal deficit of $1.5 trillion per annum and a capital account deficit of over $1 trillion per annum. America's economy will enter a period of increasingly rapid relative economic decline. In the not to distant future, U.S. defense expenditures will be cut dramatically by necessity, not choice. As U.S. standards of living decline relative to places like China or India, the bright young students from those places will stay in their home countries. (China already graduates 5 times the number of engineers as the U.S.) If you have ever seen the graduate program of elite universities (Harvard, Stanford, MIT ect) count the number of "native born" Phd aspirants. Maybe 20%. Bottom line – America is positioned vis a vis the British Empire 1900. Enjoy your "hegemony" while you can, it ain't going to last.
Leave A Reply